Big Bang in Genesis?

[Fez]

 

I don't think it's wrong to try and fit the Big Bang into God's word. As long as we don't contradict his word then what's wrong with speculating and filling in the blanks ourselves?

The Big Bang doesn't fit into God's word and is a contradiction of it.  God left those blanks unfilled for a reason and we need to be satisfied that we know what God intends for us to know and that we will receive more light on the matter when He is ready to reveal it to us. 

 

Amen!

[*Zion*]

 

That the Creation was the thought and that it was then made real. If space before the Big Bang was empty, devoid of matter, then its natural state is dark. Light and Life that comes with it, have to be physically introduced. 'Let there be light' is the Big Bang.

 

No, "let there be light" is not the big bang.   Let there be light was first ever manifestation of God's Shekinah glory.  The first thing that comes on the scene is God's glory.  it is the same glory that man cannot look upon without being destroyed.  It is the same light (although in measured form) that shone around Jesus on the Mt. of Transfiguration. 

 

We need stop surrendering the interpretation of Scripture the scientific community (and to Hollywood for that matter).

 

 

I can see visible light as being a manifestation of God's glory, but I wonder how you came to this conclusion and how you can say that it is absolutely so.

[Tolken]

Fez - Have you studied Hermeneutics? The bible was written as it was then, and has not changed. It is fatal to add our "now" to fit the intended word.

 

Genesis is quite open to interpretation simply because it is not a detailed, scientific account ... as obviously it was intended not to be. One can infer or extrapolate from the foundational truths found therein to various interpretations, and do so without contradicting scripture.  Evolution is an evil word to many Christians yet the Genesis account describes processes, surely the term “evolution” could be used to define God ordained processes. (And counter in detail to much of mainstream science’s view)  I don’t see how the “Big Bang” negates the Biblical account, ultimately the salient truth is that “In the beginning God...”.

 

Certainly the Bible has not changed however our understanding of the world around us grown exponentially. Such understanding is not “adding” to the word but in many ways a more awe inspiring glimpse of God’s handiwork.

[Guest shiloh357]

 

 

That the Creation was the thought and that it was then made real. If space before the Big Bang was empty, devoid of matter, then its natural state is dark. Light and Life that comes with it, have to be physically introduced. 'Let there be light' is the Big Bang.

 

No, "let there be light" is not the big bang.   Let there be light was first ever manifestation of God's Shekinah glory.  The first thing that comes on the scene is God's glory.  it is the same glory that man cannot look upon without being destroyed.  It is the same light (although in measured form) that shone around Jesus on the Mt. of Transfiguration. 

 

We need stop surrendering the interpretation of Scripture the scientific community (and to Hollywood for that matter).

 

 

I can see visible light as being a manifestation of God's glory, but I wonder how you came to this conclusion and how you can say that it is absolutely so.

 

The light manifested by God at the start is not the visible light we see.  It was the light that God produces and the only that emanates from Him anywhere it is mentioned in scripture.  It is His Shekinah, the inapproachable light.

[Guest shiloh357]

 

Fez - Have you studied Hermeneutics? The bible was written as it was then, and has not changed. It is fatal to add our "now" to fit the intended word.

 

Genesis is quite open to interpretation simply because it is not a detailed, scientific account ... as obviously it was intended not to be. One can infer or extrapolate from the foundational truths found therein to various interpretations, and do so without contradicting scripture.  Evolution is an evil word to many Christians yet the Genesis account describes processes, surely the term “evolution” could be used to define God ordained processes. (And counter in detail to much of mainstream science’s view)  I don’t see how the “Big Bang” negates the Biblical account, ultimately the salient truth is that “In the beginning God...”.

 

Certainly the Bible has not changed however our understanding of the world around us grown exponentially. Such understanding is not “adding” to the word but in many ways a more awe inspiring glimpse of God’s handiwork.

 

Evolution cannot be fit into Genesis.  God made everything perfectly after its own kind.  There are barriers that cannot be crossed between kinds (birds, reptiles, mammals, etc.)   Evolution proposes things that violate the description of God's creation, particularly where it comes to man having been made in God's image, completely separate from the rest of the animal kingdom.    The special creation of man alone defeats the false notion of Evolution.

 

You can believe the Bible or you can believe in Evolution, but you cannot have both and still have a coherent theology.

[OakWood]

 

 

Fez - Have you studied Hermeneutics? The bible was written as it was then, and has not changed. It is fatal to add our "now" to fit the intended word.

 

Genesis is quite open to interpretation simply because it is not a detailed, scientific account ... as obviously it was intended not to be. One can infer or extrapolate from the foundational truths found therein to various interpretations, and do so without contradicting scripture.  Evolution is an evil word to many Christians yet the Genesis account describes processes, surely the term “evolution” could be used to define God ordained processes. (And counter in detail to much of mainstream science’s view)  I don’t see how the “Big Bang” negates the Biblical account, ultimately the salient truth is that “In the beginning God...”.

 

Certainly the Bible has not changed however our understanding of the world around us grown exponentially. Such understanding is not “adding” to the word but in many ways a more awe inspiring glimpse of God’s handiwork.

 

Evolution cannot be fit into Genesis.  God made everything perfectly after its own kind.  There are barriers that cannot be crossed between kinds (birds, reptiles, mammals, etc.)   Evolution proposes things that violate the description of God's creation, particularly where it comes to man having been made in God's image, completely separate from the rest of the animal kingdom.    The special creation of man alone defeats the false notion of Evolution.

 

You can believe the Bible or you can believe in Evolution, but you cannot have both and still have a coherent theology.

 

 

This thread is about the Big Bang - it's not about evolution.

[Tolken]

Oakwood - This thread is about the Big Bang - it's not about evolution.

 

You will note that my response was simply to Fez's post where he said "Many new age proponents would love to shoehorn evolution and the big bang (among others) into scripture to fit their world view."  My post was simply responding to that point in terms of Genesis interpretation.

[Tolken]

Shiloh357 - You can believe the Bible or you can believe in Evolution, but you cannot have both and still have a coherent theology.

 

I can quite easily believe, with qualifications, in both based on scripture. I don't quite see where the "Big Bang" in any way contradicts scripture...we know one thing "In the beginning God..." then within in the limitations imposed by His word, creation is quite open to interpretation. It is obvious too that the BB is offensive to many as it posits a beginning, thus myriad opposing views and work towards a non-BB cosmology.  

[OakWood]

Oakwood - This thread is about the Big Bang - it's not about evolution.

 

You will note that my response was simply to Fez's post where he said "Many new age proponents would love to shoehorn evolution and the big bang (among others) into scripture to fit their world view."  My post was simply responding to that point in terms of Genesis interpretation.

 

Yes, I realise that but I didn't want people to become too sidetracked. Evolution is a different issue altogether and has no connection with the Big Bang.

[*Zion*]

 

 

 

That the Creation was the thought and that it was then made real. If space before the Big Bang was empty, devoid of matter, then its natural state is dark. Light and Life that comes with it, have to be physically introduced. 'Let there be light' is the Big Bang.

 

No, "let there be light" is not the big bang.   Let there be light was first ever manifestation of God's Shekinah glory.  The first thing that comes on the scene is God's glory.  it is the same glory that man cannot look upon without being destroyed.  It is the same light (although in measured form) that shone around Jesus on the Mt. of Transfiguration. 

 

We need stop surrendering the interpretation of Scripture the scientific community (and to Hollywood for that matter).

 

 

I can see visible light as being a manifestation of God's glory, but I wonder how you came to this conclusion and how you can say that it is absolutely so.

 

The light manifested by God at the start is not the visible light we see.  It was the light that God produces and the only that emanates from Him anywhere it is mentioned in scripture.  It is His Shekinah, the inapproachable light.

 

 

Ok, great.  How can you be so sure?